Drone attacks in Pakistan are counterproductive, says report | World news | The Guardian

Drone attacks in Pakistan are counterproductive, says report | World news | The Guardian

• The CIA's programme of "targeted" drone killings in Pakistan's tribal heartlands is politically counterproductive, kills large numbers of civilians and undermines respect for international law, according to a report by US academics.
• The study by Stanford and New York Universities' law schools, based on interviews with victims, witnesses and experts, blames the US president, Barack Obama, for the escalation of "signature strikes" where groups are selected merely through remote "pattern of life" analysis.
• "The dominant narrative about the use of drones in Pakistan is of a surgically precise and effective tool that makes the US safer by enabling 'targeted killings' of terrorists, with minimal downsides or collateral impacts. This narrative is false," the report, entitled Living Under Drones, states.
• The "best available information", they say, is that between 2,562 and 3,325 people have been killed in Pakistan between June 2004 and mid-September this year ? of whom between 474 and 881 were civilians, including 176 children. The figures have been assembled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism which, estimated that a further 1,300 individuals were injured in drone strikes over that period.
• The study goes on to say: "Publicly available evidence that the strikes have made the US safer overall is ambiguous at best ? The number of 'high-level' militants killed as a percentage of total casualties is extremely low ? estimated at just 2% [of deaths]. Evidence suggests that US strikes have facilitated recruitment to violent non-state armed groups, and motivated further violent attacks ? One major study shows that 74% of Pakistanis now consider the US an enemy."
• "US practices may also facilitate recourse to lethal force around the globe by establishing dangerous precedents for other governments. As drone manufacturers and officials successfully reduce export control barriers, and as more countries develop lethal drone technologies, these risks increase."
•  

Note : the original report is here 

Greece burns, but not its German arms contracts

Definitely it does sound hypocritical for the Germans to be demanding such social austerity in Greece, while at the same time maintaining massive arms contracts.  While of course Greece was profligate and would need help anyway, it needs to be highlighted when countries like German and France are imposing tough conditions, to lend money which will be used to pay bills owed to them! Furthermore it is a valid question as to whether inner core countries have been able to reduce military spending partially due to relying on (poorer) peripheral countries who have to maintain the border. Of course there is some sharing of resources in the EU, but psychologically there is more drive if one is on the perimeter. And of course military spending is often accompanied by corruption, so will always appeal to the government/elite who can profit from it, and in border countries the psychology may again enable them to convince the public to pay for it (and worth noting even some German companies have been fined/settled out of court with regards to corrupt deals with Greece).



http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/apr/19/greece-military-spending-debt-crisis?INTCMP=SRCH